Idea: Staking/burning for reputation (for vNFT sales)

Problem

Based upon public discussion about NFTs, indicates that NFT markets are having more and more issues with bad actors taking artwork that was created by other users and auctioning it off successfully. This obviously is not a great experience for either creators, traders or the economy at large. If it continues to be an issue with no real resolution then it is likely to act as a thorn on the NFT economy.

Example: https://twitter.com/Eskiworks/status/1472001510355525635

The root of the problem seems to be that with almost complete ease a person can rip off the creative work of another user (from anywhere, but in this case it has specifically been taking artwork from non-NFT platforms) and gain access to selling the work in a fraudulent way. If there is little cost involved then it would be trivial to repeat this same behavior on Joystream.

Also, we currently don't really have a system of user reputation that would work in a scenario like this. vNFT participants may not engage with other parts of the platform at all. It seems like in order to attract a significant number of sales/auctions, and significant vNFT activity, it would be desirable for participants to be able to more easily identify those that have some form of reputation (especially if they are newer accounts).

Potential solutions

• A user could stake against themselves in order to signify reputation. The stake could be slashed if the user is found to be creating sales of dubious origin. This could also apply to making channels and could serve as some loose indication for others of reputation. Maybe the Membership WG could slash the stake if bad activity occurs.
• The creation of an NFT auction could require a stake or burning of some kind. This is a lot more difficult, because once an auction is over there isn't any clear remedy or way to punish the original creator after the fact.
• A user could burn tokens against their own membership as a form of reputation. This could help to ascertain whether new sellers of vNFTs are possibly "good actors" in comparison to others who may have no tokens burned against their profile.
  • Whether or not multiple users could burn against a reputation is possibly an interesting thing to explore.

This last option feels like it may be the most worthwhile one to explore, since it could perhaps act as a source of reputation across the platform. User's having a high number of tokens burned against their profile could maybe be a signal to other users that even if they are new to the platform, they are possibly not bad actors.

Flaws / Thoughts

• If a bad actor is successful for some amount of time, they may have enough burned tokens that it negates all of this. Presumably though, if they are found to be fraudulent sellers, their membership would be suspended.
• At the same time, if they have a bad reputation in the community, it means they've had to spend additional tokens and makes making new memberships not a cheap endeavour if there is some market expectation for a creator to have some amount of tokens burned against their membership.

┆Issue is synchronized with this Asana task by Unito

No files, tests, or entry points are named. Start by reviewing the proposed staking, burning, slashing, and membership-reputation alternatives, then define the desired mechanism, affected platform components, governance authority, and measurable completion criteria before implementation.